Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Information system (IS) researchers have long noted that IS analysts need to understand users’ needs if they are to design better systems and improve project outcomes. While researchers agree that analyst communication activities are an important prerequisite for such an understanding, little is known about the nature of different communication behaviors IS analysts can undertake to learn about users’ system needs and the impact of such behaviors on IS projects. To address this gap, this paper draws from the learning literature to articulate the information transmission activities IS analysts can undertake and the content of the information they can transmit when learning about users’ organizational tasks and information needs. The influence of analyst communication activities on the generation of valid information regarding user needs, analyst learning, and IS project outcomes are then investigated via a case study of two IS projects. The analysis of the two cases suggests that analysts who encourage the use of concrete examples, testing, and validation, and who solicit feedback about users’ business processes are likely to better understand users’ tasks, and in turn design systems that better meet users’ task needs than analysts who do not.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it